Octopus Overlords

Zaxxon wrote: Fri Mar 01, 2019 11:39 am Well, we can definitely blame them.

Blame away. I just bought a new Rogue this week. I was surprised to learn that they make a hybrid version now - but at $2500 more, only a 5 mpg boost in fuel economy and a more than 20% decrease in HP I'd be surprised if they sold any to even the most dedicated tree hugger. The dealer had 85 Rogues in stock, no hybrids. In 2 months it will be used for a 1000 mile (each way) trip that I plan to make in 14 hours.

Within about 2 years we may need to supersize that car - Armada if we stay with Nissan, or a minivan if we go elsewhere.

If charging stations ever become ubiquitous at the fringe of civilization where I live, replacing my commuter car (Versa) with a battery buggy might be practical if the TCO is competitive. I'll need to feel confident about not becoming roadkill during those random 2-3 hour commutes the road gods like to drop on us once in a while.

Looks like they did indeed have to pay the $920M in cash.

If this is legit, I think I will finally have AP and probably FSD:

I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Can't please everyone.

Tesla’s price cuts have been so significant in some regions that it devaluated some recently purchased vehicles by over 40% and it pushed some owners to literally organize protests.

....

In some markets, the higher-end versions of Model S and Model X have seen overnight price reductions of over $30,000.

One of those markets is Taiwan, where the price of a Model S P100D was cut almost in half by Tesla’s latest price changes – resulting in about $100,000 in savings.

....

Is it still called ICEing if Teslas are doing it?

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:49 am I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Let me know when you see the new prices.

coopasonic wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:34 pm

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:49 am I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Let me know when you see the new prices.

Wait, I don't understand. Those of us who got in early i.e. in 2018, and presumably made Tesla some cash, are being penalized by having to pay $2k for the rest of the FSD features, while the slackers who waited till 2019 but got in before Feb 27, 2019, get it for free?

Basically, although after Chris Titus's meltdown it sounds like they're revising this. TBD.

raydude wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:04 pm

coopasonic wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 1:34 pm

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:49 am I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Let me know when you see the new prices.

Wait, I don't understand. Those of us who got in early i.e. in 2018, and presumably made Tesla some cash, are being penalized by having to pay $2k for the rest of the FSD features, while the slackers who waited till 2019 but got in before Feb 27, 2019, get it for free?

Not for free but the other stuff is cheaper. I think. Not sure.


Here's one explanation:

Consider an early Model 3 owner who purchased both AP and FSD before delivery (*the author of this article may fall into this exact category). For these two options, they will have paid $8,000, being told at the time that if they were to purchase them after delivery it would have cost them $10,000 (or $11,000 after Tesla raised the post-delivery price of FSD – and before they removed the package entirely due to “confusion”). Now, compare that to an owner who purchased neither AP or FSD – that owner can receive the same benefit today at a cost of $5,000, which is $3k less than the first owner paid (or $5k less than what they were told the post-delivery price would be).

The first owner did benefit from having autopilot for the last year-or-so of ownership, which is the price early adopters sometimes pay for gaining a benefit before others do. But now, compared to an owner who purchased AP but did not purchase FSD, that owner can get FSD today for $2,000 (according to CEO Elon Musk’s twitter anyway). This means that, for an option from which the first owner has received no benefit, and which they purchased with the promise that they were getting a lower price than if they did it post-delivery, they are now out $1,000 – or $2,000 if you compare to what Tesla said the post-delivery price would be.

So, I still don't understand. When I configured my mid-range Model 3 in November 2018 I only had three options.

EAP before delivery: $5000
EAP after delivery: $7000
No autopilot: $0

Note I'm going off of memory here, but it is pretty vivid because I recall kidding my wife about purchasing an option I will probably never use. We bought EAP before delivery. I do not recall it being billed on the website as FSD. I do have all the features listed as "FSD available now".

I do not recall them splitting the EAP into two separate packages or calling it FSD. Is anyone else in the same boat? Is my memory just faulty?

FSD has been available since they began EAP, but it was removed from the website for most of the latter half of last year because it didn't yet do anything.

The new changes are that EAP is gone, replaced by a less-functional (and cheaper) base AP (basically TACC and Autosteer) and FSD is back (and now includes currently-shipping former EAP features like Nav on Autopilot, Summon, and Autopark).

The cost for both at purchase is still $8k, but they've flipped the pricing from the old $5k EAP + $3k FSD to $3k AP + $5k FSD.

To those who already have cars with EAP, we keep all the current features and are being offered FSD for $2k rather than the originally-promised $4k after purchase. Folks with no AP can upgrade for $2k or a total of $5k to add AP and FSD. Those cars pending delivery with EAP added are getting FSD for free, and those that bought both are getting early access program invites.

It's that last paragraph that is causing an uproar, because folks like you and I have already paid $5k for EAP and would need to fork over another $2k for FSD, while if we had not bought EAP we could buy both for $5k now.

Of course one could make the argument that we've also benefitted from having EAP for months as well as a larger tax credit, but people gonna moan.

It sounds like Tesla is still trying to come up with a more equitable option for those in our position that does not result in free upgrades (since they will have a cost for the HW3 computer swapout).

You fellows might enjoy reading about the backyard mechanic who tackles Teslas.

Basically, he rescued a salvage car with the intention of restoring it, then found out that Tesla isn't subject to the Right to Repair law because it has no dealers in-state and it wouldn't sell him parts. So he improvised.

Kraken wrote: Tue Mar 05, 2019 12:10 pm You fellows might enjoy reading about the backyard mechanic who tackles Teslas.

Basically, he rescued a salvage car with the intention of restoring it, then found out that Tesla isn't subject to the Right to Repair law because it has no dealers in-state and it wouldn't sell him parts. So he improvised.

I'm well familiar with his Rich Rebuilds Youtube channel. The guy's pretty impressive.

coopasonic wrote:

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:49 am I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Let me know when you see the new prices.

I see dead people the new prices.

Saw this today as my option. I'll just hold off until the uproar dies down and Tesla has fully committed to the pricing.

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 6:08 am

coopasonic wrote:

Zaxxon wrote: Mon Mar 04, 2019 10:49 am I'm planning to add on the $2k FSD option if I can bamboozle my way into spousal approval. Worth it to me for the upgraded HW3 computer and improved NoA.

Let me know when you see the new prices.

I see dead people the new prices.

Thanks and within 3 days my car will be cool again. Up to 3 days? Just in time for spring break when I plan to stay home all week!

Ha. Still working on spousal approval here. Might need to trade some more TSLA volatility...

I got my annual bonus three weeks ago, between this and the new PC that's pretty much gone. I'm already kind of regretting going all the way to FSD, but *shrug*

Tesla's being quite disingenuous, imo.

Last week, Tesla formally asked the New York Public Service Commission (NYPSC) to reconsider a February 7 order that would give utilities incentives for installing "publicly accessible" electric vehicle (EV) chargers.

The problem, Tesla says, is that NYPSC defined "publicly accessible" chargers as those that have generic plugs for both American- and Asian-made EVs. Tesla’s proprietary charging stations do not qualify for the incentives.

The original order from NYPSC (PDF) offers utilities the ability to charge more favorable rates for electricity and use more favorable classifications for any publicly accessible Direct Current Fast Charging (DCFC) stations that the utilities install. But any chargers they install have to have both a Combined Charging System (CCS) plug and a CHAdeMo plug to be classified in the manner preferred by utilities.
...
The company argues that it isn't trying to keep non-Tesla EV owners from charging their vehicles. Instead, Tesla feels that business alternatives have not been forthcoming. "Tesla does not view its charging network as a 'walled garden' and has discussed opening the network with other OEMs, however the conversations have yet to be conclusive," the company wrote.

FWIW, it's absolutely the case that at the time that Tesla had to start building out their network, CCS and Chademo were both dumpster fires. They remain worse in many aspects today. I don't blame Tesla on this one at all. I don't necessarily think that Tesla should receive a public subsidy in this case, but they did what they had to do in order to make EVs that didn't suck in 2012-2016 or so. Forcing them to now change, when they still are the de-facto standard due to volume of sales in the US and will remain that way for the foreseeable future, is daft.

I'm not blaming them for doing what was best for them. I'm saying that unless they open up their chargers to everyone else, they shouldn't get public funding. And the idea that they don't view the charger network as a walled garden is laughable.

stessier wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:46 am I'm not blaming them for doing what was best for them. I'm saying that unless they open up their chargers to everyone else, they shouldn't get public funding. And the idea that they don't view the charger network as a walled garden is laughable.

Agreed that they don't deserve a subsidy. But it's technically not a walled garden--they'll let any vendor in that's willing to carry their weight. They also have the best charge network in the US. Calling them laughable because no one wants to admit that is kind of silly.

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:49 am

stessier wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 10:46 am I'm not blaming them for doing what was best for them. I'm saying that unless they open up their chargers to everyone else, they shouldn't get public funding. And the idea that they don't view the charger network as a walled garden is laughable.

Agreed that they don't deserve a subsidy. But it's technically not a walled garden--they'll let any vendor in that's willing to carry their weight. They also have the best charge network in the US. Calling them laughable because no one wants to admit that is kind of silly.

What do you mean "they will let a vendor if they carry their weight". It shouldn't have anything to do with the car company. I own an electric car, I should be able to plug it in to a charger. They could open their chargers and charge what is necessary for the electricity - just like EA, EvGo, Chargepoint, etc. None of those are tied to a car company and it works just fine.

I think their standard will end up like Apple while everyone else will be like Android. Both will work just fine in their own way.

stessier wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:05 amWhat do you mean "they will let a vendor if they carry their weight".

I mean assist with continued build-out proportional to their vehicle fleet size relative to Tesla's.

It shouldn't have anything to do with the car company. I own an electric car, I should be able to plug it in to a charger. They could open their chargers and charge what is necessary for the electricity - just like EA, EvGo, Chargepoint, etc. None of those are tied to a car company and it works just fine.

Just fine, sure. Not well compared to Tesla. I get that you aren't coming from Tesla so you won't necessarly grok why--built-in billing/handshaking, nav routing, availability monitoring, centralized deployment planning, etc.

I think their standard will end up like Apple while everyone else will be like Android. Both will work just fine in their own way.

Likely. And at the end of the day, I largely agree that they don't need a subsidy for this. It's just annoying watching all these other companies build out clearly and intentionally inferior networks rather than working with the market leader. It's also worth mentioning that while you currently view the other networks as working just fine, it's not at all clear that these companies have a sustainable business model. They're certainly not filling in availability well as Tesla, and that's even with VW's court-mandated large infusion of cash.

Zaxxon wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:13 am

It shouldn't have anything to do with the car company. I own an electric car, I should be able to plug it in to a charger. They could open their chargers and charge what is necessary for the electricity - just like EA, EvGo, Chargepoint, etc. None of those are tied to a car company and it works just fine.

Just fine, sure. Not well compared to Tesla. I get that you aren't coming from Tesla so you won't necessarly grok why--built-in billing/handshaking, nav routing, availability monitoring, centralized deployment planning, etc.

Those are not things I need from a charger. Are they nice to have - sure. But I'm fine with dumb chargers as long as I know where they are.

I think their standard will end up like Apple while everyone else will be like Android. Both will work just fine in their own way.

Likely. And at the end of the day, I largely agree that they don't need a subsidy for this. It's just annoying watching all these other companies build out clearly and intentionally inferior networks rather than working with the market leader. It's also worth mentioning that while you currently view the other networks as working just fine, it's not at all clear that these companies have a sustainable business model. They're certainly not filling in availability well as Tesla, and that's even with VW's court-mandated large infusion of cash.

I mean, it's not clear Tesla has a sustainable charging business model either. Considering the number of EVs currently on the road, I'm not sure we need as many networks as we have. Hopefully they all have enough cash to make it to the point where EVs become more prevalent.

I'm not sure why you think the new networks are clearly and intentionally inferior. They charge at the same or higher speeds than the Superchargers and interoperate with all the cars currently available (even Teslas if they have the adapter...except, I've heard, the Model 3...don't know if that is true or not). The EA build out is going pretty well and they have mentioned their biggest roadblock is all the red tape that is necessary to get a site open. They are currently in the process of planning Phase 2 and have asked for suggestions on where the next batch of chargers should go. EvGo is also a court mandated system and continues to expand even though I think they have fulfilled their obligation. I think Chargepoint is the only widespread, non-court ordered player. I haven't had to use any of their chargers, yet, so can't really comment.

I think it's because I actually road trip in my 3 and you don't. On a one-off basis, the other networks are fine (so long as it's not busy where you want to charge). Try to road trip on anything but Superchargers and you'd quickly come around. Toss in the Destination charging program and it's even more lopsided.

That's the clearly part. As for intentionally, I basically mean no other entity is taking a 10,000-ft view of their network and cars. Taking into account location, speed, availability, ease of use, in-car/in-app integration, customer support, etc. Lots of half-assed efforts but nothing aiming to dethrone the SC network anytime soon.

That'll likely come in time as EV penetration continues to rise, but it's not here now, and the gap is widening, not shrinking. Tonight's v3 presentation will be interesting.

If you use a charging station, do you need to carry your adapter with you?

Jaymann wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 2:50 pm If you use a charging station, do you need to carry your adapter with you?

If using a J1772 station (eg a non-Tesla L2 station), yes. You can't use CCS/Chademo on the Model 3 (yet). In Europe, the 3 supports CCS so I imagine it's only a matter of time before we get an adapter here. The S/X have a Chademo adapter but it's not cheap.

There's also a J1772 to Tesla adapter so everyone else can use the Tesla destination chargers. It's about $300. It fits on Superchargers, but doesn't allow charging.

What about the Tesla charging stations?

There are two types of charging stations - Tesla destination chargers and Tesla Superchargers.

The destination chargers are available at hotels and the like. They charge at slower rates like a home charger.

Superchargers are the one's for long distance travel and are found on/near highways.

Both come with their own plugs that connect directly to Tesla cars - no adapters required.


Separately, if a Tesla wants to use a non-Tesla charger, they have to use an adapter to connect from the cord on the charger to their car.

Is that what you were asking?

Right. For a Tesla driver, no adapters needed for Superchargers or Destination chargers. Adapter needed for L2 J1772 plugs. No adapter available for CCH/Chademo yet. For regular wall outlets, your UMC will suffice (default plugs are 'regular' 5-15 and 14-50, but you can buy adapters for virtually any outlet type for $35).

stessier wrote: Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:53 pm There are two types of charging stations - Tesla destination chargers and Tesla Superchargers.

The destination chargers are available at hotels and the like. They charge at slower rates like a home charger.

Superchargers are the one's for long distance travel and are found on/near highways.

Both come with their own plugs that connect directly to Tesla cars - no adapters required.


Separately, if a Tesla wants to use a non-Tesla charger, they have to use an adapter to connect from the cord on the charger to their car.

Is that what you were asking?

Yes.

https://www.tesla.com/blog/introducing-v3-supercharging

Highlights:
1000 mph peak charge rate for Model 3 @ 250 kW
Existing v2 sites will receive OTA updates to take them from 120 kW to 145 kW peak power
No stall power sharing at v3 sites
v3 launch will start in Q2 and include thousands of v3 stalls in place by end of 2019

That's pretty cool as is the intelligent battery warm up. I wonder what those speeds will do to the life of the battery.

I'm guessing not much based on their history of protecting from heavy degradation. The 250 kW speed is also currently limited to the 3 which has a newer chemistry and cooling layout, and tapers down starting around 30% charge.

Will be interesting to see what max speeds the S and X get, and whether there's a pack redesign coming for them. Seems odd that the long-term plan is for the 3 to lead the way here.

Tom Randall with some context on this Supercharger upgrade, including some more commentary on why Tesla's all in-house approach is difficult for non-integrated OEMs/charge providers to replicate:

Any idea how Teslas would do in 0F to -40F weather? Keeping charge overnight not plugged in. Distance on a charge?

Sent from my ONEPLUS A5010 using Tapatalk

Can't speak to -40F, but my car is fine at 0F and around there. Theoretically an EV will have less problem starting in the cold than an ICE since all the starter battery has to do is open the HV pack contactors. Range will decrease, partially as the car reserves more energy in the pack due to the cold, partially due to the heavier air, and partially due to the HVAC use (in an ICE car, heating is largely 'free' since it's waste heat from the engine. In an EV, you gots to create that heat because the powertrain itself is so efficient).

As for lower efficiency in colder temps, here's my data so far: